As @417 already said and I confirmed it , coaching is freaking overrated!
You can't make gold out of **** as you can't make **** out of gold!
''Hold my beer...'' - Michel Therrien
“... and my smokes.”
As @417 already said and I confirmed it , coaching is freaking overrated!
You can't make gold out of **** as you can't make **** out of gold!
''Hold my beer...'' - Michel Therrien
Really? I thought we traded him 5 minutes after drafting him for some reason.Sergachev played 4 games for us last year. With Scherbak having to clear waivers, he'll make the team or be traded.
There were a few who had him in the 80's. Also some who referred to him as a Superstar, like the poster you quoted.
How do explain the results they got under such an incompetent coach?
So now Alzner is your worst player? You go to some extremes only to argue.
Carlson is a top offensive defenseman. Alzner is a stay-at-home defenseman. If Alzner returns to form, close to the player he was before his hand injury, you end up with a very strong pairing. In fact, three very good pairs. And you got that by putting Alzner in the best position for him to succeed.
I now realize I am just repeating myself.
Agreed - yet it's constantly presented this way.Not to mention pretty much all the young players (and even the old ones) had great numbers under MT.
So I don't get how an argument can be made that a coach plays such an important role in the players development, but then completly dismiss MT's role in his players having great seasons. Its not like PK/Max/Price/Gally/AG were 10 year vets in the league. They were still young players 21/22/23 when he took over.
I am not saying give MT credit, he didn't make PK into PK or Price into Price. But he didn't prevent them either and you can't on one hand say coaching is so important but then say every player played great in spite of the coach. Its a contradictory argument to me. If the habs group all were great in spite of MT well then the coach doesn't really make that much of a difference.
Odd...i've been told it was just that65 is highly optimistic, but not delusional.
As @417 already said and I confirmed it , coaching is freaking overrated!
You can't make gold out of **** as you can't make **** out of gold!
Philly is going to get eliminated, but they made the playoffs on the back of Giroux's 100 points. I was advocating trading for him this summer as I saw it as a better deal than giving Radu his contract.
Where is our hero? I bet if Hudon or Lek played on any other team they would have 80+ pts, but habs luck our players are always busting.
As [B]@417[/B] already said and I confirmed it , coaching is freaking overrated!
You can't make gold out of **** as you can't make **** out of gold!
WTF is wrong with you ?
WTF is wrong with you ?
Ok it's official then!
So I'm guessing you're co-authoring a research paper for Nature, together.
A hyperbolic statement, but if those guys were on a TB or Pitts they would probably be doing much better than they did this year.
And I liked Hudon and Leks game this year don't get me wrong. But other teams seem to find these gems while the habs get stuck with 30-40 point guys who we lose patience with and trade away.
Yeah they would do better, but not 100%+ more points.
Can you remind me what your offer for Giroux was cause i do remember plenty of daily Giroux threads to Mtl for peanuts?Keep in mind a 40 point player on the habs is really a 60 point player on any team. Its the Montreal Tax
Most of the hockey world thought he was at least a 60-70 point guy. I think Ray Ferraro said he would score 30 rolling out of bed.
Its no different than the posters who keep saying AG is going to be a PPG center. Being high on a former 3rd OVA pick isn't that much of a reach.
Odd...i've been told it was just that
Beyond converting him to center, which I don't think was the biggest reason why he struggled...I think not acquiring anyone to insulate him was worse.It was strictly wishful thinking after Drouin was deployed at centre. He was set up to fail. Horrible decision making from above.
Not to mention pretty much all the young players (and even the old ones) had great numbers under MT.
So I don't get how an argument can be made that a coach plays such an important role in the players development, but then completly dismiss MT's role in his players having great seasons. Its not like PK/Max/Price/Gally/AG were 10 year vets in the league. They were still young players 21/22/23 when he took over.
I am not saying give MT credit, he didn't make PK into PK or Price into Price. But he didn't prevent them either and you can't on one hand say coaching is so important but then say every player played great in spite of the coach. Its a contradictory argument to me. If the habs group all were great in spite of MT well then the coach doesn't really make that much of a difference.
Beyond converting him to center, which I don't think was the biggest reason why he struggled...I think not acquiring anyone to insulate him was worse.
I mean, to convert him to center is one thing...but then to use him as your "#1" center with Tomas Plekanec & Philippe Danault as his insulation, is what actually set him up to fail, IMO.
Can you remind me what your offer for Giroux was cause i do remember plenty of daily Giroux threads to Mtl for peanuts?
He was sooo done.
The guy was on decline. He went from 86 points to 73 to 67 and 58 you add this to his age and contract and you get bad offer, that were legit at time.
Today it's another story.
Can you remind me what your offer for Giroux was cause i do remember plenty of daily Giroux threads to Mtl for peanuts?
He was sooo done.
Something to consider is that Galchenyuk was close to PPG the last time he regularly played centre.
Bergevin didn't do Drouin or the team any favours by forcing him at centre.